CHATTISGARH NISHAKAT JAN VITT AVAM VIKAS NIGAM, RAIPUR,RAIPUR V. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPT., RAIPUR

ITA 112/RPR/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Chhattisgarh Nishakat Jan Vitt Avam Vikas Nigam, a state government corporation, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeal was initially not admitted due to a delay of 188 days, which the CIT(A) found unsatisfactory based on the reasons provided by the assessee. The assessee had faced administrative hindrances and lacked financial data as it had never been assessed under the Income Tax before. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay justified, considering the assessee's status as a state government corporation and the procedural constraints of its bureaucratic setup. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 846170 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Raipur
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR GOLCHHA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; FORM 26AS
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

" 1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर Ɋायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR ŵी पाथŊ सारथी चौधरी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अवधेश क ुमार िमŵ, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 112/RPR/2026 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ Assessment Year: 2020-21) Chhattisgarh Nishakat Jan Vitt Avam Vikas Nigam, Block-C, 1st Floor, RDA Building, Near Ghadi Chowk, GE Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492001 Vs Assessing Officer, Income Tax Department, Central Revenue Building, Raipur-492001 PAN: AADCC3077D (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) िनधाŊįरती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Golchha, CA Shri Parshwa Rajesh Gochha, CA राजˢ की ओर से / Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 20/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 24/03/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, AM: This appeal for Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2020-21 filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.12.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). 2. With 10 grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the impugned order not only on the merit but also on the legal issue. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.112/RPR/2026 Chhattisgarh Nishakat Jan Vitt Avam Vikas Nigam, Raipur vs. AO, Raipur 2 3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee, a non-filer of the Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the relevant year, has made cash deposit of Rs.34,69,629/- in its bank account. Further, the assessee has earned interest income of Rs.66,81,471/- as evident from the Form 26AS of the assessee. Based on these information, the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’) reopened the case of the assessee under section 148 of the Act. During the reopened assessment proceedings, the assessee did not ensure any compliance before the Ld. AO as detailed in paragraph 2 on page No.2 of the assessment order. The Ld. AO, therefore, in absence of any compliance on the part of the assessee has no option except to complete the assessment under section 147 rws 144 and 144B of the Act. The consequential reassessment was completed at income of Rs.1,10,40,519/- by making following two additions: (i) Interest income of Rs.75,70,890/- (ii) Unexplained bank deposits of Rs.34,69,629/-. 3.1 Aggrieved with the reopened assessment order, the assessee filed belated appeal (188 days) before the Ld. CIT(A), who did not admit the appeal as the reason for delay put forward by the assessee that the delay took place due to difficulties faced in gathering financial data and administrative over sight. The said reason for condonation of delay was not found satisfactory by the Ld. CIT(A). He therefore, did not admit the appeal and dismissed the appeal accordingly. 4. Before us, Shri Rajesh Golchha, CA, Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal on the ground of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.112/RPR/2026 Chhattisgarh Nishakat Jan Vitt Avam Vikas Nigam, Raipur vs. AO, Raipur 3 delay as the reason submitted for belated appeal was not found satisfactory by the Ld. CIT(A). He further submitted that the assessee, a state Government Corporation, was not having financial data and its staff handling the income tax matter were not competent enough to handle the litigation as the assessee had not ever assessed under the Income Tax. Further, he submitted that there were certain administrative hindrances, which also delayed in filing the 1st appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). He drew our attention to the fact that the 2nd appeal was filed within the prescribed period. He therefore, prayed for remanding the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. 5. Dr. Priyanka Patel, Ld. Sr. DR did not oppose the remanding back of the case to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both parties and have perused the material available on the record. We have taken note of the fact that the assessee, a State Government Corporation with its own administrative set up, which are not well acquainted with appellate income tax procedure. The reason put forward by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay mentioned above; prima-facie, seems justified as its income tax matter of the assessee was not handled by the tax expert till the issue got complicated. Further, the procedural constraints due to bureaucratic set-up cannot be ruled out in delayed filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Further, we also take note of the fact that the State Government Corporation is not well equipped with personnel to deal with the tax matter; hence, keeping in view the entire facts of the case, we hereby condone the delay taken place in filing the appeal before the Ld. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.112/RPR/2026 Chhattisgarh Nishakat Jan Vitt Avam Vikas Nigam, Raipur vs. AO, Raipur 4 CIT(A). Further, we set aside the impugned order and remit matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the case afresh/denovo on merit after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to mention that the appellant assessee has to cooperate in remitted appellate proceedings. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed subject to the above. 7. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/03/2026. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; िदनांक Dated 24/03/2026 HKS, PS आदेशकी Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, //True copy// (Private Secretary) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "